Référence épique et modernité par Cédric Chauvin (review)

devoted specifically to the “dramaticules,” this volume is a welcome addition to the corpus of Beckett studies. Metropolitan State University of Denver Ann Williams Chauvin, Cédric. Référence épique et modernité. Paris: Champion, 2012. ISBN 9872 -7453-2343-9. Pp. 356. 80 a. Chauvin studies recent revivals of interest in the epic in Georges Dumézil’s writings on the Indian Mahabharata (1968–2003),Philippe Jaccottet’s translation of the Odyssey (1953–2004), Pierre Klossowski’s translation of the Aeneid (1964 and 1989), and the novels of Jean Giono, Julien Gracq, and Claude Simon. Current consensus defines the epic genre only as a “long narrative poem.” Traditionally, Homer’s epics were seen as “historical,” whereas Virgilian and Aristotelian models were considered esthetic narrative structures. Macpherson’s “Ossianic” poems deconstructed this distinction for his contemporaries by claiming to recover ancient history from Bardic fragments of supposedly collective memories. Chauvin misses the powerful force of artistic elaboration in Arthurian legend (history refers to that king in only one line, as the victor of the Battle of Badon Hill), and the phenomenon of the “petites épopées” of Vigny and Hugo, which transform history into allegory. Elsewhere in long epics, meandering digressions, mythological counterplots, and thematic composition predominate over historical reports. Conventional scenes such as the council, the mustering of armies, the challenge, or the aristeia (exemplary heroic exploits by an individual) comprise the backbone of most epics.Above all,improvisation characterizes oral epics, as it does rap or jazz. Chauvin’s ever-widening circle of examples ultimately suggests that“epicness”is not an essence, but an attribute. His treatments of individual works are much more interesting. He cogently characterizes Dumézil’s attempts to “give a (didactic) voice”to the sprawling Mahabharata. Jaccottet translated the Odyssey twice, in 1955 and 1981. The first time, four years before he began publishing poetry, he compromised between philological accuracy and poetic values. He holds to Schiller’s category of “naïve” poetry (close to Nature), as opposed to “sentimental” poetry (nostalgic for a lost contact with Nature). He rejects the “empty” epic poetry of Perse, Segalen, and Char as a decadent, empty splendor, not realizing—I would add—that such poetry is quintessentially Modernist, presenting a totalizing cosmic vision rather than retelling old tales. Jaccottet’s retranslation retreats into literalism. Critics attacked Klossowski’s Aeneid for the same fault, Chauvin recalls, but he then drifts into discussing Klossowski’s novels in general terms, losing sight of his subject. His chapter on Giono is noteworthy, revealing Ariosto’s pervasive influence, and describing a half-century of Giono’s historically-oriented critical and novelistic writing that followed his epic novels of the 1930s, but which is little known in academe. A reevaluation of Giono is called for. As for Gracq, Chauvin explains, he sees epic 204 FRENCH REVIEW 88.3 Reviews 205 literature as quest literature, and therefore focuses on open-ended versions of the Grail cycles. He finally declares that all literature should be autotelic. Simon’s epic novels of the two World Wars, Chauvin convincingly argues, center around an evacuated space, filled only with sense impressions and personal memories. The insane horrors of modern warfare have made heroic grandeur and historical coherence impossible. Concluding, Chauvin shrewdly sends the cycle of historical loss and epic recovery off for another spin, evoking Pierre Bordage’s Griots célestes and George Martin’s A Game of Thrones. Stay posted. Oberlin College Affiliate Scholar (OH) Laurence M. Porter Cousseau, Anne, et Jacques-David Ebguy, éd. Écrire, disent-ils: regards croisés sur la littérature du XXIe siècle. Nancy: PUN-Edulor, 2012. ISBN 978-2-8143-0113-9. Pp. 206. 15 a. Cet ouvrage aborde les enjeux esthétiques, socioéconomiques et idéologiques de la littérature produite en ce début de siècle sous la forme d’un dialogue entre la parole de l’écrivain et le commentaire critique de son œuvre.Dans ce face-à-face le praticien révèle ses pratiques d’écriture et l’universitaire celles de sa lecture, posant ainsi “les jalons d’une conceptualisation esthétique possible du‘contemporain’”(6). Il s’agit d’élucider ce terme qui...